So, I’ve found myself editing video and animating still photographs. It’s a weird thing seeing as this is a photography project and the project *is still a photography book. But — I seem to relish any opportunity to challenge my creativity and learn tools that make me want to bang my head up against the studio wall.
What I’m trying to do is find a way to turn still images of dynamic, sport-y action into moving images of dynamic, sport-y action.
Why is that interesting?
I look at the photos up all around the studio and they’re moving somehow, especially after looking at them for a long time, as I find myself doing when I try to decide and edit and consider what I’m doing and how I can do it better. Especially editing layouts of the second prototype book. Decisions need to be made in the way the images work on a flat page, or how they juxtapose adjacent — recto/verso — to one another. Even moving an image from one page by itself to a page with an image opposite seems to affect the dynamism and the appearance of movement.
Or..maybe I’ve been looking at them too long!
N’ah. Well — maybe when this is all done it’ll make sense to you when you get your own copy!
In the meantime, I keep waffling back and forth between Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Pro X (FCP and FCPX as they are referred to in all the vitriolic discussions about how much FCPX sucks for all those professionals who can’t understand how Apple changed FCP so much.)
For the tech-heads out there, Some interesting ways of doing things other than the canonical, somewhat tiresome (especially if its done for a full two or three minutes) Ken Burns effect are described by CS computer graphics-y folks at the University of Washington in this academic paper called Parallax Photography: Creating 3D Cinematic Effects from Stills.